| Home >> Lost Sermons

The Bishop Of Chicoutimi Opposes The Tridentine Mass


Following the request of a Chicoutimi faithful [motupropriochicoutimi.over-blog.com], here's my analysis of the integral contents of Bishop André Rivest's message, published (among others) in the Parish flyer of Sacré-Coeur (Chicoutimi-Ouest) of June 8th 2008. (My sloppy translation from the French.) Please also note that personally, even though I condemn the pseudo-spirit of Vatican II, I nevertheless prefer the Paul VI Mass.

[Yellow] 1. In July 2007, the Holy Father extended to the whole Church the possibility of celebrating Mass according to the liturgical books promulgated June 23 1962, i.e. before the Vatican II Council. It's called the "extraordinary form" of the Mass.

Strictly speaking, the extraordinary form of the Eucharistic liturgy was never abolished, so the Pope couldn't "extend this possibility to the whole Church":

As for the use of the 1962 Missal as a Forma extraordinaria of the liturgy of the Mass, I would like to draw attention to the fact that this Missal was never juridically abrogated and, consequently, in principle, was always permitted.
[Letter from Benedict XVI appended to Summorum Pontificum]

(For precision-loving folk, according to that same document, after the appearance of the Paul VI Mass in 1969, there was a legal "no-man's-land". Of course, this legal "no-man's-land" was exploited to the maximum by the wolves, who took that opportunity to speak as if the extraordinary form was forbidden. (History therefore repeats itself with this letter from Chicoutimi's bishop, as we'll conclude here below.) In 1984, "Quattuor abhinc annos" imposed conditions for the use of the extraordinary form, which were then softened first by "Ecclesia Dei" in 1988, then even more by "Summorum Pontificum" in 2007.)

[Yellow] In liturgical language, the word "extraordinary" means exceptional.

I admit I've never seen this assertion in the teachings of the Church, especially not concerning the distinction between the ordinary form and the extraordinary form of the rite.

[Green] During the celebration under this extraordinary form, the Priest celebrates Mass in Latin and his back to the congregation, as in the past, and participants communicate on their knees and on the tongue. The current form of celebrating the Mass is the "ordinary form".

Yes, but according to Vatican II, the ordinary form of the Mass is also in Latin:

Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites.
[Sacrosanctum Concilium, #36.1]

Moreover, the official teachings of Vatican II never mention communing on the tongue or in the hands, kneeling down or standing up. Same thing for the position of the Priest turned toward God ("ad orientem") or toward the congregation.

These days, those are the most visible signs that we're participating in a Mass done according to the extraordinary form, but it's mostly because in Quebec, the Mass is almost never celebrated according to the ordinary form. What we are presented with, as being a "Vatican II Mass", is in fact a deformation born of The Satanic "Spirit" Of Vatican II.

[Many Catholics nevertheless wanted to have the Mass according to the extraordinary form]. This occurred above all because in many places celebrations were not faithful to the prescriptions of the new Missal, but the latter actually was understood as authorizing or even requiring creativity, which frequently led to deformations of the liturgy at the limit of what can be endured.
[Letter from Benedict XVI appended to Summorum Pontificum]

[Green] 2. One month ago, a petition signed by 100 persons was presented to me, asking me for the authorization of having a Mass once a month under the "extraordinary form", in one of the three churches of the Parish, preferably at the Christ-Roi church. According to the Holy Father's Motu Proprio I had the power to authorize this request.

[Green] 3. But since the people who signed mainly came from different Parishes of the Diocese, and by solidarity with the diocese's global pastoral ["pastorale d'ensemble" in French], I thought it appropriate to consult Monsignor André Rivest, the first pastor of the Diocese, and at the same time submit to him the petition so he would give a diocesan orientation to this subject.

[Green] 4. Monsignor Rivest consulted his presbyteral Council (composed of different Priests of the diocese) this past Monday May 19 and the next day he phoned me to tell me he thought it good to not grant the authorization to celebrate the Mass under the "extraordinary form" in the diocese for the following reasons:

[Green] 4.a. The Motu Proprio says: "In parishes, where there is a stable group of faithful who adhere to the earlier liturgical tradition, the pastor should willingly accept their requests to celebrate the Mass according to the rite of the Roman Missal published in 1962" (article 5.1). Neither in the Sacré-Coeur Parish, nor in the Diocese, does there exist a stable group. The petition's signers don't form a stable group, a permanent group, a community as such, but a set of persons scattered in the diocese who, for a vast majority, don't have a continuous bond between them.

Bang, in the bull's eye! Yes, once more, we can observe the perverse effects of Catholish. The Bishop is absolutely right, according to the letter of the law. The Motu proprio clearly says exactly that:

In parishes, where there is a stable group of faithful [...].
[Summorum pontificum, article 5.1]

If the Pope's intention was to grant the faithful access to the extraordinary form, he worded the regulations very poorly. As it's stated, you almost need to be a "Parish within a Parish", to be able to prove that a stable group of faithful in a Parish has always adhered to the old Mass. Imagine! Pope Paul VI basically removed the old Mass, Priests stopped saying it, and the faithful should be able to prove that they never stopped celebrating it? How could that happen? Monsignor André Rivest's interpretation simply removes the possibility for faithful to have access to the extraordinary form, but this interpretation is totally compatible with the wording. Even Article 7 is useless:

If a group of lay faithful, as mentioned in article 5.1, has not obtained satisfaction to their requests from the pastor, they should inform the diocesan bishop. The bishop is strongly requested to satisfy their wishes. If he cannot arrange for such celebration to take place, the matter should be referred to the Pontifical Commission "Ecclesia Dei".
[Summorum Pontificium, article 7]

Here again, the reference to the "stable group in a Parish" is clear. No mention is made of a group of faithful, as large as you may want, who is only united by its desperate thirst for a Mass not vandalized by heretic Priests sodomized by the "spirit" of Vatican II.

Cardinal Marc Ouellet, to his credit, himself authorized the same Mass in his Diocese, for faithful who didn't form a stable group, and who came from several different Parishes. The ambiguity of the Motu proprio neither approves nor disapproves of him. On the other hand, common sense and the Catholic Faith warmly thank him!

[Yellow] 4.b. The Bishop has the role of protecting unity in the Diocese and he has the authority and the responsibility of the liturgy and the pastoral care of the faithful.

Here again, Monsignor Rivest uses the rich possibilities of dissent offered by any text written in Catholish. The Pope clearly says:

In conclusion, dear Brothers, I very much wish to stress that these new norms do not in any way lessen your own authority and responsibility, either for the liturgy or for the pastoral care of your faithful.
[Letter from Benedict XVI appended to Summorum Pontificum]

The Pope could very well have said, for example:

I repeat the eternal teaching of the Holy Vatican II Council which clearly says that I, the Pope, have on the whole Church, full, supreme and universal power, and I'm always free to exercise this power [Lumen Gentium, #22, §2]. Moreover, when Christ speaks of unity, He doesn't mean unity between the faithful and Satan, but between the faithful and Christ. We must not hesitate to cause divisions, when Bishops and Priests behave like wolves.
[The Encyclical Recessus Est ("Recess Is Over") of Pope Elvis 1, a Pope who also innovated by being the first to use an Arab numeral in his name instead of a Roman numeral, in order to promote inter-religious dialog with Muslims.]

[Yellow] The authorization to celebrate Masses under the "extraordinary form" would be a source of divisions among the Priests and the faithful and the impact of such a celebration risks being negative.

The Pope explicitely says:

These two expressions of the Church's Lex orandi will in no any way lead to a division in the Church's Lex credendi (Law of belief). They are, in fact two usages of the one Roman rite.
[Summorum pontificum, #1]

On the other hand, if his intention was to facilitate access to the extraordinary form, he almost eliminates that possibility by saying here:

[Some have expressed the fear] that the possibility of a wider use of the 1962 Missal would lead to disarray or even divisions within parish communities. This fear also strikes me as quite unfounded. The use of the old Missal presupposes a certain degree of liturgical formation and some knowledge of the Latin language; neither of these is found very often.
[Letter from Benedict XVI appended to Summorum Pontificum]

[Green] 4.c. Among the criteria put forth by the Holy Father in his Motu Proprio, the Bishop must examine if the requesters and the Priests themselves have the liturgical training and a "certain familiarity" with the "extraordinary form" of the Latin rite, as well as a good knowledge of the Latin tongue which Pope Benedict XVI himself judges necessary for a fruitful celebration according to the "extraordinary form". But, among the signatories very few can positively answer to those criteria.

I don't agree with this paragraph, but Monsignor Rivest quotes the Pope almost word for word! (See the preceding paragraph.)

[Green] 5. After having consulted my pastoral team, I totally agree with Monsignor Rivest's position who asked me to transmit his decision to you. I therefore do not authorize the celebration of the Mass under it's "extraordinary form" in the Sacré-Coeur Parish.

[Green] 6. Nevertheless, persons wishing to have such a Mass can go to Saint-Francis-of-Assisi church, 1381, 1ère Avenue, Limoilou, Québec, every Sunday and on Feast days, at 10 AM (sung Mass).

Jean-Roch Gaudin, moderator Priest.

There you go! Chicoutimi Priests will be able to continue to deprive the faithful of their rights, with full approval of their Bishop, and in full conformity with the letter of the law.

I can't wait for the pontificate of Elvis 1...

| Home >> Lost Sermons